Skip to main content

Full text of "Islam And Ahmadism By Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal"

See other formats






MA, Ph.D., D.Litt., LL.D., Barrister-at-Law 



A MliilHhiA liMMtlMl I*"' ' ' ' 

All 1 1 I ) I < I ^ I ■ < ' t ■ I ( ' 1 1 M 

iiiliHinaUMM «htMi|i ItliiHi i»MMth 
ilUHIlinl (lit- i|im|(v*miU k •«« >liti<hU 
IMtiilllW«llli|l« nil ^ I Ik 

"I loilttii" fiilMltniiMi nl [t.i^>. litivliiM 
I tMiijiulHj^iMl I Hiii|iimlhti * "< I ('« tMltl 

i'K>i<||(<Ml |M|llflll|t \SHU h I' miMImI imIiMII'<I 

AMdiiiil •iiih'«t tl)iilifM ititlv Km, lUUA 

{lluliHltllM I'm J )lilll| I 4)1 MIllMlile \ht 

Viiin tirmiM voMM Kji ' i-.lhir money (U'llcr, 

PlvilH i (Mlf 111 I 

I )tiin hi! ) I I 

( fiiiiiil Odi ItijllK-c-TuhafTuz- 

r KImUhiii 1 Nn.luiw\\(U Itn/oori Bagh 

Kmiil. Ntiiliiiii I'liklHliiii 

Pli (IM '.'I'MK f«*?"fi1)M2277 





AND ^ 








M. A., Ph.D., D.Litt,, LL.D., Barrister-at-Law 

Published by: 

Aalami Majlis-e-Tahamjz-e-Khatam-e-Nubuwwat, 
Over Seas Office : 35, STOCKWELL GREEN LONDON 
SW 9 9HZ U.K. Ph: 0207-737-S199 
Central office: Hazoori Bagh Road, Multan, 
Ph:061 -514122 Fax: (92-61)542277 

is presenting this lucid and impres- 
sive Statement of Dr. Sir Muhammad 
Iqbal to the English-knowing and 
through it the whole -world hopes 
that those who take the views of 
ulema as narrow-minded and bigoted 
will realize the grave nature of the 
mischief— both religious and cul- 
tural — that Ahmadism tends to 
cause to the body-politic of Islam. 



Ovefseas Office : 35, STOCKWELL GREEN 


[By Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbai] 

On the appearance of Pandit Jawahai* 
Lai Nehru's three articles in the Modern 
Review of Calcutta I received a number 
of letters from Muslims of different shades 
of religious and political opinion. Some 
writers of these letters want me to further 
elucidate and justify , the attitude of the 
Indian Muslims towards the Ahmadis. 
Others ask me what exactly I regard as 
the issue involved in Ahmadism. In this 
statement I propose first to meet these 
demands which I regard as perfectly 
legitimate, and then to answer the questions 
raised by Pandit Jawahar Lai Nehru. I 
fear, however, that parts of this statement 
may not interest the Pandit, and to save 
his time I suggest that he may skip over 
such pafts. 

It is hardly necessary for me to say 
that I welcome the Pandit's interest in 
what I regard as one of the greatest, pro- 
blems of the East and perhaps of the 
whole worlds He is, I believe, the first 
Nationalist Indian leader who has express- 
ed a desire to understand the present 


spiritual unrest in the world of Islam. 
In view of the many aspects and possible 
reactions of this unrest it is highly desir- 
able that thoughtful Indian political leaders 
should open their mind to the real meaning 
of what is at the present moment agitating 
the heart of Islam, 

I do not wish, however, to conceal the 
fact either from the Pandit or from any other . 
reader of this statement that the Pandit's 
articles have for the moment given my 
mind rather a painful conflict of feelings. 
Knowing him to be a man of wide cultural 
sympathies my mind cannot but incline 
to the view that his desire to understand 
the questions he has raised is perfectly 
genuine ; yet the way in which he has 
expressed himself betrays a psychology 
which I find difficult to attribute to him. 
I am inclined to think that my statement 
on Q,adianism— no more than a mere ex- 
position of a religious doctrine on modern 
lines — has embarrassed both the Pandit and 
the Qadianis, perhaps because both in- 
wardly resent, for different reasons; the 
prospects of Muslim political and religious 
solidarity particularly in India. It is 
obvious that the Indian Nationalist whose 

political idealism has practically killed his 
sense for fact, is intolerant -of the birth of 
a desire for self-determination in the heart 
. of North-West Indian Islam. He thinks, 
wrongly in my opinion, that the only way to 
Indian Nationalism lies in a total suppres- 
sion of the cultural entities of the country 
through th^ interaction of which alone 
Indija can evolve a ' rich and enduring 
culture. A nationalism achieved by such 
methods can mean nothing but mutual 
bitterness and even oppression. It is equally 
obvious that the Qadianis, too, feel nervous 
by the political awakening of the Indian 
Muslims, because they feel that the rise 
in political prestige of the Indian Muslims 
is sure to defeat their designs to carve 
out from the Ummat of the Arabian Pro- 
phet a new Ummat for the Indian Prophet. 
It is no small surpriseto me that my effort to 
impress on the Indian Muslims the extreme 
necessity of internal cohesion in the present 
critical moment of their history in India ; 
and my warning them against the forces of 
disintegration, masquerading as Reformist 
movements, should have given the Pandit 
an occasion to sympathize with such forces. 
However, I do not wish to pursue the. 


unpleasant task of analyzing the Pandit's 
motives. For the benefit of those who want 
further elucidation of the general Muslim 
attitude towards the Qadianis, I would quote 
a passage from Durant's Story of Philo- 
sophy which I hope will give the reader a 
clearer idea of the issue involved in 
Qadianism. Durant has in a few sentences 
summed up the Jewish point of view in the 
excommunication of the great philosopher 
Spinoza. The reader must not think that 
in quoting this passage I mean to insinuate 
some sort of comparison between Spinoza 
and the founder of Ahmadism. The dis- 
tance betwen them, both in point of in- 
tellect and character* is simply tremendous. 
The "God-intoxicated** Spinoza never 
claimed that he was the centre of a new 
organization and that ail the Jews who did 
not believe in him were outside the pale of 
Judaism. Durant*s passage, therefore, 
applies with much greater force to the 
attitude of Muslims towards Qadianism 
than to the.attitude of the Jews towards 
the excommunication of Spinoza. The 
passage is as follows : - 

Furthermore, teligious unanimity seemed to 
the elders their sole means of preserving the 


little Jewish group in Amsterdam from disinteg- 
ration, and almost the last means of preserving 
the unity, and so ensuring the survival, of the 
scattered Jews of the world. If they had had 
their own state, their own civil law, their own 
establishments of secular force and power, to 
compel internal cohesion and external respect, 
they might have been" more tolerant but their 
religion was to them their patriotism as well as 
their faith ; the synagogue was their centre of 
social and political life as well as of ritual 
and worship ; and the Bible whose veracity 
Spinoza had impugned was the "Portable 
Fatherland" of their people ; under the 
circumstances they thought heresy was treason, 
and toleration suicide 
^iSituated as the Jews were - a minority 
community in Amsterdam — they were per- 
fectly justified in regarding Spinoza as a 
disintegrating factor threatening the dis- 
solution of their community. Similarly the 
Indian Muslims are right in regarding the 
Qadiani Movement, which declares the 
entire world of Islam as Kafir and socially 
boycotts them, to be far more dangerous 
to the collective life of Islam in India 
than the metaphysics of Spinoza to the 
collective life of the Jews. The Indian 
Muslim, I. believe, instinctively realizes 
the peculiar uature of the circumstances 
in which he "is placed in India and is natur- 

ally much more sensitive to- the forces of 
disintegration than the Muslims of any 
other country. This instinctive perception 
of the average Muslim is in my opinion 
absolutely correct and has, I have no doubt, 
a much deeper foundation in the conscience 
of Indian Islam, Those who talk of toler- 
ation in a matter like this ■ are extremely 
careless in using the word toleration which 
I fear they do not understand at all. 
The spirit of toleration may arise from 
very different attitudes of the mind of man. 
As Gibbon would say : There is the 
toleration of the philospher to whom all 
religions are equally true ; of the historian 
to whom all are equally false ; and of the 
politician to whpm all are equally useful. 
There is the toleration of the man who 
tolerates other modes of thought and be- 
haviour because he has himself grown abso- 
lutely indifferent to all modes of thought 
^and behaviour. There is the toleration of 
the weak man who, on account of sheer 
weakness, must pocket all kinds of insults 
heaped on things or persons whom he holds 
dear. It is obvious that these types 
of tolerance have no ethical value. On the 
other hand they unmistakably reveal the 

spiritual impoverishment of the man who 
practises them. True toleration is be- 
gotten of intellectual breadth and spiritual 
expansion* It is the toleration of the 
spiritually powerful man who, while jealous 
of the frontiersx^ of his own faith, can 
tolerate and even appreciate all forms of 
faith other than his own. Of this type 
of toleration the true Muslim alone is cap- 
able. His own faith is synthetic and for 
this reason he can easily find grounds of 
sympathy and appreciation in other faiths. 
Our great Indian poet, Amir Khusro, 
beautifully brings out the essence of this 
type of toleration in the story of an idol- 
worshipper. After giving an account of his 
intense attachment to his idols the poet 

addressee his Muslim readers as follows : 


Only a true lover of God can appreciate 
the value of devotion even though it is 
directed to gods in which he himself does 
not believe. The folly of our preachers of, 
toleration consists in describing the attitude 
of the man who is jealous of the boundaries 
of his own faith as one of intolerance. They 

wrongly consider this attitude as a sign 
of moral, inferiority. They do not under- 
stand that the value of . his attitude is 
essentially biological. Where the members 
of a group feel, either instinctively or on 
the basis of rational argument, that the 
corporate life of the- social organism to 
which they belpng is in danger their defen- 
sive attitude must be appraised in reference 
mainly to a biological criterion. Every 
thought or deed in this connection must be 
judged by the life-value that it may possess. 
The question in this case is not whether 
the attitude of an individual or community 
towards the man who is declared to be a 
heretic is morally good or bad. The question 
is whether it is life-giving or life-destroying. 
Pandit Jawahar Lai Nehru seerms to think 
that a society founded on religious princi- 
ples necessitates the institution of Inquisi- 
tion. This is indeed true of the history of 
Christianity ; but the history of Islam, 
contrary to the Pandit's logic, shows that 
during the last thirteen Hundred years of 
the lift of Islam, the institution of Inquisi- 
tion has been absolutely unknown in Muslim 
countries. The Quran expressly prohibits 
such an institution. "Do not seek out the 

shortcomings of others and carry not tales 
against your brethren.'* Indeed the Pandit 
.will find from the history of Islam that the 
Jews and Christians, fleeing from religious 
persecution in their own lands, always found 
shelter in the lands of Islam. The two . 
propositions on which the conceptual struc- 
ture of Islam is based are so simple that it 
makes heresy in the sense of turning the 
heretic outside the fold of Islam almost 
impossible. It is true that when a person 
declared to be holding heretical doctrines 
threatens the existing social order an 
independent Muslim state will certainly 
take action ; but in such a case the action 
of the state will be determined more by 
political considerations than by purely 
religious ones. I can very well realize that 
a man like the Pandit, who is born and 
brought up in a society which has no well- 
defined boundaries and consequently no 
internal cohesion, finds it difficult to 
conceive that a religious society can live and 
prosper without state-appointed commis- 
sions of enquiry into the beliefs of the 
people. This is quite clear from the 
passage which he quotes from Cardinal 
Newman and wonders how far I would 


accept the application of the Cardinal s 
dictum to Islam. Let me tell him that there 
IS a tremendous difference between the 
jnner structure of Islam and Catholicism 
wherem the complexity, the ultra-rational 
character and the number of dogmas has, 
as the history of Christianity shows, always 
fostered possibilities of fresh heretical 
interpretations. The simple faith of 
Muhammad is based on two propositions 
— that God is One, and that Muhammad is 
the last of the line of those holy men who 
have appeared from time to time in all coun- 
tries and in all ages to guide mankind to the 
right ways of living. If, as some Christian 
writers think, a dogma must be defined as 
an ultra-rational proposition which for the 
purpose of securing religious solidarity must 
be assented to without any understanding of 
Its metaphysical import, then these two 
simple propositions of Islam cannot be 
described even as dogmas ; for both of them 
are supported by the experience of mankind 
and are fairly amenable to rational argu- 
ment. The question of a heresy, which 
nee<is the verdict whether the author of it 
is withm or without the fold can arise, in 
the case of a religious society founded on 


such simple propositions, only when the 
heretic rejects both or either of these 
propositions. Such heresy must be and 
has been rare in theliistory of Islam which, 
while jealous of its frontiers, permits 
freedom of interpretation within these 
frontiers. And since the phenomenon of 
the kind of heresy which affects the bound- 
aries of Islam has been rare in the history 
of Islam, the feeling of the average Muslim 
is naturally intense when a revolt of this 

tkind arises. That is why the feeling of 
Muslim Persia was so intense against the 
Bahais. That is why the feeling of the 
Indian Muslims is so intense against the 

It is true that mutual accusations of 
heresy for differences in minor points of 
law and theology among Muslim religious 
sects have been rather common- In this 
indiscriminate use of the word kufr both 
for minor theological points of difiference 
as well as for the extreme cases of heresy 
which involve the excommunication of the 
heretic, some present-day educated Ivlushms 
who possess practically no knowledge 
of the histcry of Muslim theological 
disputes, see a sign of social " and political 


disintegration of the Muslim community. 
This, however^ is an entirely wrong notion. 
The history of- Muslim Theology shows 
that mutual accusation of heresy on minor 
points of difference has, far from w^orking 
as a disruptive force, actually given an 
impetus to synthetic theological thought. 
''When we read the history of develop- 
ment of Muhammaden Law", says Prof. 
Hurgrounje, "we find that, on the one 
hand, the doctors of every age, on the 
slightest stimulus, condemn one another 
to the point of mutual accusations of heresy; 
and, on the other hand, the very same 
people with greater and greater unity of 
purpose try to reconcile the similar quarrels 
of their predecessors." The student of 
Muslim Theology knows that among Muslim 
legists this kind of heresy is technically 
known as "heresy below heresy," i.e,, the 
kind of heresy which does not involve the 
excommunication of the culprit. It may ' 
be admitted, however that in the hands of 
mullahs whose intellectual laziness takes 
all oppositions of theological thought as 
absolute and is consequently blind to the 
unity in difference, this minor heresy may 
become a source of great mischief. This 

mischief can be remedied only by giving to 
the students of our theological schools a 
clearer vision of the synthetic spirit of 
Islam, and by re-initiating them into the 
function, of logical contradiction as a 
principle of movement in theological 
dialectic. The question of what may be 
called major heresy arises only when the 
teaching of a thinker or a reformer affects 
the trontiers of the faith of Islam. Unfor- 
tunately this question does arise in connec- 
tion with the teachings of Qadianism. It 
must be pointed out here that the Ahmadi 
movement is divided into two camps known 
as the Qadianis and the Lahoris. The 
former openly declare the foundef- to be a 
full prophet ; the latter, either by convic- 
tion or policy, have found it advisable to 
preach an apparently toned down Qadian- 
ism. However, the question whether the 
founder of Ahmadism was prophet the 
denial of whose mission entails what I call 
the ''major heresy" is a matter of dispute 
between the two sections. It is unnecessary 
for my purposes to judge the merits of this 
domestic controversy of the Ahmadis. I 
believe, for reasons to be explained pre- 
sently, that the idea of a full prophet whose 


denial entails the denier*s excommunica- 
tion from Islam is essential to Ahmadism ; 
and that the, present head of the 
Qadianis is far more consistent with the 
spirit of the movement than the Imam of 
the Lahoris. 

The cultural value of the idea of 
Finality in Islam I have fully explained 
elsewhere. Its meaning is simple : No 
spiritual surrender to any human being 
after Muhamtnad who emancipated his 
followers by giving them a law which 
is realizable as arising from the very 
core of human conscience. Theologically 
the doctrine is that : The Socio-political 
orgariizatiori^alled "Islam" is perfect and 
eternal. No revelation the denial of which 
entails heresy is possible after Muhammad. 
He who claims such a revelation is a traitor 
to Islam. Since the Cjadianis believe the 
founder of the Ahmadiyya movement to be 
the bearer of such a revelation, they declare 
that the entire world of Islam is infidel. 
The founder's own argument, quite worthy 
of a mediaeval theologian^ is that the spiritu- 
ality of the Holy Prophet of Islam must 
be regarded as imperfect if it is not 
creative of another Prophet. He claims his 

own Prophethood to be an evidence of the 
Prophet-rearing power of the spirituality of 
the Holy Prophet of Islam. But if you 
further ask him whether the spirituality of 
Muhammad is capable of rearing more pro- 
phets than one, his answer is "No." This 
virtually amounts to saying : *'Muhammad 
is not the last Prophet ; I am the last/' 
Far from understanding the cultural value 
of the Islamic idea of finality in the history 
of mankind generally and of Asia especially^ 
he thinks that finality in the sense that no 
follower of Muhammad can ever reach the 
status of Prophethood is a mark of imper- 
fection in Muhammad Prophethood. As 
I read the psychology of his mind he, in 
the interest'of his own claim to Prophet- 
hood, avails himself of what he describes 
as the creative spirituality of the Holy 
Prophet of Islam and at the same time 
deprives the Holy Prophet of his 'finality* 
by limiting the creative capacity of his spiri- , 
tuality to the rearing of only one prophet, 
i.e., the founder of the Ahmadiyya move- 
ment. In this way does the new prophet 
quietly steal away the 'finality* of one whom 
he claims to be his spiritual progenitor. 
He claims to be a ' buruz ( sJji ) of the 


Holy Prophet of Islam insinuating thereby 
that, being a * buruz * of him, his ' finality' 
is virtually the ' finality * of Muhammad ; 
and that this view of the matter, therefore, 
does not violate the * finality * of the Holy 
Prophet, In identifying the two finalities, 
his own ^nd that of the Holy Prophet, 
he conveniently loses sight of the temporal 
meaning of the idea of Finality. It 
is, however, obvious that the word 
* buTuz * in the sense even of complete 
likeness, cannot help him at all ; for the 
huruZt * must always remain the other 
of its original. Only in the sense of rein- 
carnation a * buruz ' becomes identical 
with the original- Thus if we take the 
word^* buruz ' to mean ** like in spiritual 
qualities" the argument remains ineffective ; 
if, on the other hand, we take it to mean 
reincarnation of the original in the Aryan 
sense of the word, the argument becomes 
plausible ; but its author turns out to be 
only a Magian in disguise. 

It is further claimed on the. authority of 
the great _ Muslim Mystic,, Muhyuddin 
Ibn-i-Arabi of Spain, that it is possible for 
a Muslim saint to attain, in his spiritual 
evolution, to the kind of experience charac- 


tcnstic oi the prophetic consciousncsti. I 
piiM sonally believe this view of the Sheikh 
Muhyuddin Ibn-i-Arabi to be psychologi- 
cally unsound; but assuming it to be correct 
the Qadiani argument is- based on a com- 
plete misunderstanding of his exact posi- 
tion. The Sheikh regards it as a purely 
private achievement which does not, and 
m the nature of things cannot, entitle such 
a samt to declare that all those who do not 
beheve in him are outside the pale of Islam. 
Indeed, from the Sheikh's point of view, 
there may be more tham one saint, living 
in the same age or country, who may attain 
to prophetic consciousness. The point to 
be seized IS that while it is psychologically 
possible for a saint to attain to prophetic 
experience, his experience will have no 
socio-pohtical significance making him the 
centre of a new organization and entitling 
hitn to declare this organization to be the 
criterion of the faith or disbelief of the 
followers of Muhammad. 

Leaving his mystical psychology aside I 
■am convinced from a careful study of the 
relevant passages of the Futuhat that the 
great Spanish mystic is as firm a believer in 
the Finahty of Muhammad as any orthodox 


Muslim. And if he had seen in his mystical 
vision that one day in the East some Indian 
amateurs in Sufism would seek to destroy 
the Holy Prophet*s finality under cover of 
his mystical psychology, he would have cer- 
tainly anticipated the Indian Ulema in 
warning the Muslims of the world against 
such traitors to Islam. 


Coming now to the essence of Ahmad- 
ism. A discussion of its sources and of the 
way in which pre-Islamic Magian ideas 
have, through the channels of IsTamic mys- 
ticism, worked on the mind of its author 
would be extremely interesting from the 
standpoint of comparative religion » It is, 
however, impossible for me to undertake 
this discussion here. Suffice it to say that 
the real nature of Ahmadism is hidden 
behind the mist of mediaeval mysticism and 
theology- The Indian Ulema, therefore, 
took it to be a purely theological movemerit 
and came out with theological weapons to 
deal with it. I believe, however, that this 
was not the proper method of dealing 
with the movement ; and that the success 
of the Ulem» was, therefore, onl^ partial. 
A careful psychological analysis of the 


revelations of the founder would perhaps 
be an effective method of dissecting the 
inner life of his personality. In this 
connection I may mention Maulvi Manzoor 
Elahi's collection of the founder's revela- 
tions which offers rich and varied material 
for psychological research. In my opinion 
the book provides a key to the character 
and personality of the founder; and I do 
hope that one day some young student of 
modern psychology will take it up for 
serious study* If he takes the Quran for 
his criterion, as he must for reasons which 
cannot be explained here, and extends his 
study to a comparative examination of the 
experiences of the founder of the Ahmadiy- 
ya movement and contemporary non- 
Muslim mystics, such as Ram Krishna of 
Bengal, he is sure to meet more than one 
surprise as to the essential character of 
the cxpcVience on the basis of which pro- 
phethood is claimed for the originator of 

Another equally effective and more 
fruitful method, from the standpoint of the 
plain man, is to understand the real content 
of Ahmadism in the light of the history of 
Muslim theological thought in India at least 


trom the year 1799. The year 1799 is 
extremely important in the history of the 
world of Islam. In this year fell Tippu ; 
and his fall meant the extinguishment of 
Muslimhopes for political prestige in India. 
In the same year was fought the battle of 
Navarneo which saw the destruction of the 
Turkish fleet. Prophetic were th§- words 
of the author of the chronogram of Tippu*s 
fall which visitors of Serangapatam find 
engraved on the wall of Tippu's mausoleum; 
" Gone is the glory of Ind as well as of Roum/' 
Thus in the year 1799 the political decay 
of Islam in Asia reached its climax- But 
just as out of the humiliation of Germany 
on the day of Jena arose the modern 
German nation, it may be said with equal 
truth that out of the political humiliation of 
Islam in the year 1799 arose modern Islam 
and her problems. This point I shall 
explain in the sequel. For the present I 
want to draw the reader's attention to 
some of the questions which have arisen in 
Muslim India since the fall of Tippu and 
the development of European imperialism 
in Asia. 

Does the idea of Caliphate in Islam 
embody a religious institution ? How are 


the Indian Muslims and for the matter of 
thatall Muslims outside the Turkish Empire 
related to the Turkish Caliphate ? Is India 
Dar-ul~Harb or Dar-ul-Islam ? What is the 
real ixieaning of the doctrine of Jihad in 
Islam? Whatisthe meaning of the expres- 
sion " From amongst you " in the Quranic 
verse : Obey God, obey the Prophet and 
the masters of the affair, i.e., rulers, from 
amongst you''? What is the character of 
the traditions of the Prophet foretelling 
the advent of , Imam Mehdi ? These ques- 
tions and some others which arose sub- 
sequently were, for obvious reasons, ques- 
tions for Indian Muslims only. European 
imperialism, however, which was thenrapidly 
penetrating the world of Islam, was also 
intimately interested in them. The con- 
troversies which these questions created 
form a moat interesting chapter in the 
history of Islam in India. The story is a 
long one and is still waiting for a powerful 
pen. Muslim politicians whose e>^es were 
mainly fixed on the realities of the situation 
succeeded in winning over a section of the 
ulema to adopt a line of theological argu- 
ment which as they thought suited.the situa- 
tion ; but it was not easy to conquer by 


mere logic the beliefs which had ruled for 
centuries the conscience of the masses of 
Islam in India. In such a situation logic 
can either proceed on the ground of political 
expediency or on the lines jaf a fresh orient- 
ation of texts and traditions. In either 
case the argument will fail to appeal to the 
masses. To the intensely religious masses 
of Islam only one thing can make a con- 
clusive appearand that isDivine Authority. 
For an effective eradication of orthodox 
beliefs it was found necessary to find a 
revelational basis for a politically suitable 
orientation of theological doctrines involved 
in the questions ^ mentioned above. This 
revelational basis is provided byAhmadism, 
And the Ahmadis themselves claim this to 
be the greatest service rendered by them to 
British imperialism. The prophetic claim to 
a revelational basis for theological views of 
a political significance amounts to declaring 
that those who do not accept the claimant's 
views are infidels of the first water and 
destined for the flames of Hell. As I 
understand the significance of. the move- 
ment, the Ahmadi belief that Christ died 
the death of. an ordinary "mortal, and 
that his second advent means only the 


advent of a person who is spiritually * like 
unto him/ give the movement some sort of 
a rational appearance ; but . they are not 
really essential to the spirit of the move- 
rnent. In my opinion they are only pre- 
liminary steps towards the idea of full 
prophethood which alone can serve the 
purposes of the movement eventually 
brought into being by new political forces. 
In primitive countries it is not logic but 
authority that appeals. Given a sufficient 
amount of ignorance, credulity which stran- 
gely enough sometimes co-exists with good 
intelligence, and a person sufficiently auda-. 
cious to declare himself a recipient of Divine 
revelation whose denial would entail eternal 
damnation, it is easy, in a subject Muslim 
country, to invent a political theology and 
to build a community whose creed is politi- 
cal servility. And in the Punjab even an 
ill-woven net of vague theological expres- 
sions can easily capture the innocent 
peasant who has been for centuries exposed 
to all kinds of exploitation. Pandit Jawahar 
Lai Nehru advises the orthodox of all 
religions to unite and thus to delay the 
coming of what he conceives to be Indian 
Nationalism. This ironical advice assumes 


that Ahmadism is a reform moverhent ; he 
does not know that as far as Islam in Iiidia 
IS concerned Ahmadism involves both reli- 
gious and political issues of the highest 
^^portance. As I have explained above, 
the function of Ahmadism in the history of 
Muslim religious thought is to furnish a 
revelational basisforlndia's present political 
subjugation. Leaving aside the purely re- 
ligious issues, on the ground of political 
issues alone it does not lie in the mouth of 
a man like PanditXjawahar Lai Nehru to 
accuse Indian Muslims of reactionary con- 
servatism. I have no doubt that if he had 
grasped the real nature of Ahmadism he 
would have very much appreciated the atti- 
tudte of Indian Muslims towards a religious 
movement which claims Divine authority 
for the woes of India. 

. ^^^s the reader will see that the pallor 
of Ahmadism which we find on the cheeks 
of Indian Islam to-day is not an abrupt 
phenomendn in the history of Muslim re- 
ligious thought in India. The ideas which 
eventually shaped themselves in the form 
of this movement became prominent in 
theological discussions long before the 
founder of Ahmadism was b&n. Nor do 


I mean to insinuate that the founder of 
Ahmadism and his companions deli4>erately 
planned their fHTogramme. I dare say the 
founder of the Ahmadiyya movement did 
hear a voice ; but whether this voice came 
from the God of Life and Power or arose 
out of the spiritual impoverishment of the 
people must depend upon the nature of the 
movement which it has created and the 
kihd of thought and emotion which it has 
given to those who have listened to it. 
The reader must not think that^I . am 
using metaphorical language. The Jife- 
history of nations shows that when tac 
tide of life in a people begins to ^bb, 
decadence itself becomes a source of 
inspiration, inspiring their poets, philoso- 
phers, saints, statesmen and turning them 
into a class of apostles whose sole ministry 
is to glorify, by the force of a seductive art 
or logic, ail that is ignoble and ugly Ik the 
life of their people.- These apostles uncon- 
sciously clothe despair in the glittering 
garment of hope, undermine the traditional 
values of conduct and thus destroy the 
-spiritual virility of those who happen to be 
their victims One can only imagine the 
rotten state of a people's will who arc, on 


the basis of Divine authority, made to 
accept their political environment as linal. 
Thus all the actors who participated in the 
dram_aof Ahmadism were, I think, only inno- 
cent instruments in the hands of decadence. 
A similar drama had already been acted in 
Persia ; but it did not lead, and could not 
have led, to the religious and political issues 
which Ahmadism has created for Islam in 
India. Russia offered tolerance to Babism 
and allowed the Babia to open their first 
missionary centre in Ishqabad. England 
showed Ahmadis the same tolerance in 
allowing them to open their first missionary 
centre in Wofein^'. Whether Russia and 
England showed this tolerance on the 
gi-ound of imperial expediency or pure 
btoadmindedness is difficult for us to 
decide. This much is absolutely clear that 
this tolerance has created difficult problems 
for Islam in Asia; In view of the structure 
of Islam, as I understand it, I haVe not the 
least doubt in my mind- that Islam will 
emerge purer out of the difficulties thus 
created for her. Times are changing. 
Things in India have already taken a new 
turn. The new spirit of democracy which 
is coming to India is sure to disillusion the 


Ahmadis and to convince them of the 
absolute futility of their theological inven- 

Nor will Islam tolerate any revival of 
mediaeval mvsticism which has already rob- 
bed its followers of their healthy instincts 
and given them only obscure thinking in 
return. It has, during the course of the 
past centuries, absorbed the best minds 
of Islam leaving the affairs of the state to 
mere mcdiocrifies. Modern Islam cannot 
afford to repeat the experiment. Nor 
c*m it tolerate a repetition of the 
l^unjab experiment of keeping Muslims 
occupied for half a century in theological 
problems which had absolutely no bearing 
on life. Islam has already passed into the 
broad daylight of fresh thought and experi- 
cn^cc ; and no saint or prophet can bring it 
Ijack to the fogs of mediaeval mysticism. 


Let me now turn to Pandit Jawahar 
Lai Nehru's questions- I fear the Pandit's 
articles reveal practically no acquaintance 
with Islam or its religious history during 
the 19th century. Nor does he seem to 


have 'read what I have already written on 
the subject of his questions. It is not 
possible for me to reproduce here all that 
I have written before* Nor is it possible 
to write here a religious history of Islam in 
the 19th century without which a thorough 
understanding of the present situation in 
the world of Islam is impossible. Hundreds 
of books aad articles have been written on 
Turkey and modern Islam. I have read 
most of this literature and probably the 
Pandit has also read it. I assure him, 
however, that not one . of these writers 
understa'nds the nature of the effect or of 
the cause that has brought about that effect. 
It is. therefore, necessary to briefly indicate 
the main currents of Muslim thought in 
Asia during the 19th century. 

I have said above that in the year 1799 
the political decay of Islam reached its 
climax. There can, however, be no greater 
testimony to the inner vitality of Islam 
than the fact that it practically took no 
time to realize its position in the world. 
During the 19th century were born Sir 
Syed Ahmad Khan in India, Syed Jamal-ud- 
Din Afghani in Afghanistan and Mufti Alam 
Jan in Russia. These rnen were probabjy- 


inspired by Mohammad Ibn-i- Abdul 
Wahab who was born in Najd in 1700, 
the founder of the so-called Wahabi 
movement which may fitly be described 
as the first throb of life in modern 
Islam. The influence of Sir Syed Ahmad 
Khan remained on the whole confined to 
India, It is probable, however, that he 
was the jfirst modern Muslim to catch a 
glimj)se of the positive character of the 
age which was coming. The remedy for 
the ills of Islam pioposed by him> as by 
Mufti Alam Jan in Russia, was modern 
fducation. But the real greatness of 
tlur man consists in the fact that he 
wiis the first Indian Muslim who felt the 
neetl of a fresh orientation of Islam and 
worked for it. We may differ from his 
religious views, but there can be no deny- 
ing the fact that his sensitive soul was the 
first to react to the modern age. 

The extreme conservatism of Indian 
Muslims which had lost its hold on the reali- 
ties of life failed to see the reai meaning of 
the religious attitude of Syed Ahmad Khan. 
In the North-West of India, a country 
more primitive and more saint-ridden than 
the rest of India, the Syed's movement was 


soon followed by the reaction of Ahmadism 
— a strange mixture of Senietic and Aryan 
mysticism with whom spiritual revival con- 
sists not in the purification of the indivi- 
dual's inner life according to the principles 
of the old Islamic Suftism, but in satisfying 
the expectant attitude of the masses by 
providing a 'Promised* Messiah. The 
function of this 'Promised Messiah' is not 
to extricate the individual from an ener- 
vating present but to make him slavishly 
surrender his ego to its dictates. This 
reaction carries within itself a very subtle 
^ contradiction. It retains the discipline 
of Island, but destroys the will which that 
discipline was intended to fortify. 

Maulana Syed Jamal-ud-Din Afghani 
was a man of a different stamp. Strange 
are the ways of Providence i One of the 
most advanced Muslims of our time^ both 
in religious thought and action, was born in 
Afghanistan ! A perfect master of nearly 
all the -Muslim languages of the world 
and endowed with the most winning 
eloquence, his restless soul migrated from 
one Muslim country to another influencing 
some of the most prominent men in Persia. 
Egypt and Turkey, Some of the greatest 


theologians of our times such as . 
Mufti Muhammad Abduhu, and some ot 
thrmenof the younger generation who 
l.itrr became political leaders, such as 
/.u'hlul Pasha of Egypt, were his disciples. 
\ {v wrote little, spoke much and thereby 
tranformed into miniature Jamal-ud-Dins 
„ll those who came into contact with 
hiin. He never claimed to be a prophet 
ttt ii rrncwcr ; yet no man in our tinie 
lias atirred the soul of Islam more deeply 
than he. His spirit is still working m 
the world of Islam and nobody knows 
where it will end. 

It may, however^ be asked, what exactly 
was the objective of these great Muslims ? 
The answer is that they found the world ot 
Islam ruled by three main forces and 
they concentrated their whole energy on 
creating a revolt against these forces : 

I, Mullaism.—The^ Uletna have always 
been a source of great strength to Islam. 
But during the course of centuries, es- 
pecially since the destruction of Baghdad, 
they became extremely conservative and 
would not allow an^ freedom of Ijtihadt 
i.e., the formipg of independent judgment 
in matters of law. The Wahabi movement 


which was a source of inspiration to the 
19th century Muslim reformers was really 
a revolt against this rigidity of the IJlcma. 
Thus thgr first objective of the 19th century 
Muslim reformers was a fresh orientation 
of the faith and a freedom to reinterpret 
the law in the light of advancing experience. 

2. Mysticism. — The masses of Islam 
wer^ swayed by the kind of mysticism 
which blinked actualities, enervated the 
people and kept them steeped in all 
kinds of superstition. From its high estate 
as a force of spiritual education, mysticism 
had fallen down to a mere means of exploit- 
ing the ignorance and the credulity of 
the people. It gradually and invisibly 
unnerved the will of Islam and softened 
it to the extent of seeking relief from 
the rigorous discipline of the law of 
Islam,. The 19th century reformers rose 
in revolt against this mysticism and called 
Muslims to the broad daylight of the 
modern world. Not that they were 
materialists. Their mission was to open 
the eyes of the Muslims to the spirit of 
Islam which aimed ait the conquest of 
matter and not jflight from it. 

J. Muslim Kings whose gaze was 


«oIely fixed on their own dynastic interests 
and who, so long as these were protected, 
did not hesitate to sell their countries 
to the highest bidder. To prepare the 
masses of Muslims for a revolt against such 
ii state of things in the world of Islam 
was the special mission of Syed Jamal-ud- 
I lin Af^Jvani. 

It iH not possible here to give a detailed 
nccount ol the transformation which these 
reformers brought about in the world 
of Muslim thought and feeling. One thing, 
however, is clear. They prepared to a 
^neat extent the ground for another set of 
men. I.e., Zaghlul Pasha, Mustafa Kamal 
and Raza Shah. The reformers inter- 
preted, argued and explained ; but the 
M't of men who came. after them, although' 
inferior in academic learning are men who, 
iHying on their healthy instincts, had 
(he courage to rush into sun-lit space and 
do, even by force, what the new con- 
ditions of life demanded. Such men 
are liable to make mistakes ; but the 
history of nations shows that even their 
iinstakcs have sometimes borne good 
Iniil. In , them it is not logic but life struggles restless to solve its own 


problems. It may be- pointed out here 
that Syed Ahmad Khan, Syed Jamal-ud- 
Din Afghani and hundreds of the latter s 
disciples in Muslim countries were not 
westernized Muslims. They were men who 
had sat on their knees before the Mullahs 
of the old school and had breathed the 
very intellectual and spiritual atmosphere 
which they later sought to reconstruct. 
Pressure of modern ideas may be admitted ; 
but the history thus briefly indicated above 
clearly shows that the upheaval which has 
come to Turkey and which is likely, sooner 
or later, to come to other Muslim countries, 
is almost wholly determined by the forces 
within. It is only the superficial observer of 
the modern world of Islam who thinks that 
the present crisis in- the world of Islam 
is wholly due to the working of alien forces. 

Has then the world of Islam outside 
India or especially Turkey abandoned 
Islam Pandit Jawahar Lai Nehru thinks 
that Turkey had ceased to be a Muslim 
country. He does not seem to realize 
that the question whether a person or a 
community has ceased to be a member of 
Islam is, from the Muslinn point of 
view, a purely legal question and must be 


decided in view of the structural pnnciplefl 
of Islam. As long as a person is loyal to 
thi- two basic principles of Islam, t.^., the 
Unity of God and Finality ^^^f 
Prophet, not even the strictest Mullah can 
turn him outside the pale of Islam even 
though his interpretations of the Law or 
of the text of the Quran are believed to be 
erroneous. But perhaps Pandit Jawahar 
Lai Nehru has in his mind the supposed or 
TK'M itinovations which the Ata-Turk has 
i III reduced. Let us for a moment examme 
these, Is it the development of a general 
materialist outlook in Turkey which seems 
inimical to Islam ? Islam has had too 
much of renunciation ; it is time for the 
Muslims to look to realities. Materialism 
irt a had weapon against religion ; but 
it is quite an effective one against mullah- 
craft and Rufi-craft' which deliberately 
mvstify the people with a view to 
exploit their ignorance and credulity. The 
spirit of Islam is not afraid of its contact 
with matter. Indeed the Quran says : "For- 
et not thy share in the World." It is 
Jifficult for a non-Muslim to understand 
lluit, considering the history of the Muslim 
world during the last few centuries, the 



progress of a materialist outlook is only a 
torm of self-realization. Is it then the aboli- 
tion of the old dress or the introduction of 
the Latin Script ? Islam as a religion has 
no country ; as a society it has no specific 
language, no specific dress. Even the 
recitation of the Quran in Turkish is not 
without some precedent in Muslim history. 
I'ersonally I regard it as a serious error . of 
judgment ; for the modern student of the 
Arabic language and literature knows full 

u- u u * "^"^^y non-European language 
which has a future is Arabic. But the reports 
are that the Turks have already abandon- 
ed the Vernacular recitation of the Quran, 
Is It. then the abolition of Polygamy or the 
licentiate Ulema ? According to the Law 
ot Islam the Amir of a Muslim State has the 
power to revoke the '^permissions" of the 
Jaw it he is convinced that they tend to 
cause social corruption. As to the licentiate 
Ulema I would certainly introduce it in 
Mushm India if I had the power to do so. 
X? 11 u .^^/e^t;ons of the myth-making 
Mullah is largely due the stupidity of the 
average Muslim. , In excluding him from 
;^e religious life of the people the Ata- 
1 urk has done what would have delighted 

37 ' 

the heart of an Ibn-i-Taimiyyia or a Shah 
Wall Ullah. There is a tradition of the Holy 
Piophet reported in the 'Mishkat to the 
effect that only the Amir of the Muslim 
State and the person or persons appointed 
by him are entitled to preach to the people. 
I do not know whether the Ata-Turk 
ever knew of this tradition ; yet it is stnk- 
in« how the light of his Islamic conscience 
hwH illumined the zone of his action in this 
imnortant matter. The adoption ot the 
Swi^S Code with, its rule of inheritance is 
certainly a serious error which has arisen 
out of the youthful zeal for reform excus- 
able in a people furiously desiring to go 
ahead. The joy of emancipation from the 
fetters of a long-standing priest-cratt some- 
times drives a people to untried courses ot 
action. But Turkey as well as the rest ot 
the world of Islam have yet to realize the 
hitherto unrevealed economic aspects oUhe 
Islamic law of inheritance which Von 
Kremer describes as the ^Supremely 
original branch of Muslim law . is it tne 
abolition of the Caliphate or the separation 
of Church and State ? In its essence Islamr 
ift not Imperialism. In the abolition of 
the Caliphate' which since the days ot 


Omayyads had practically become a kind of 
Empire it is only the spirit of Islam that 
has worked out through the Ata-Turk. In 
order to understand the Turkish Ijtihad in 
the matter of the Caliphate we cannot but 
seek the guidance of Ibn-i-Khaldun — the 
great philosophical historian of Islam, and 
the father of modern history, I can do .no 
better than to quote here a passage from 
my Reconstruction : 

Ibn-i Khaldun in his famous Prolegomena 
mentions " three distinct views of the idea of 
Universal Caliphate in Islam : (l) That Universal 
Imamate is a Divine institution and is conse- 
quently indispensable, (2) That it is merely a 
matter of expediency. (3) That there is no need 
of such an institution. The last view was taken 
by the Khawarij, the early Republicans of Islam, 
It seems that modern Turkey has shifted from 
the first to the second view, i.e., to the view of 
the Mutazila who regarded Universal Imamate as 
a matter of expediency only. The Turks argue 
that in our political thinking we must be guided 
by our past political experience which points 
unmistakably to the fact that the idea of universal 
Imamate has failed in practice. It was a work- 
able idea when the Empire of Islam was intact. 
S?nce the break-up of this Empire independent 
units have arisen. The idea has ceased to be 
uperative and cannot work as a living factor in 
the organization of modern Islam. 


anil State alien to Islam. The doctrine of 
the Major Occultation of the Imam in a 
Hcnse effected this separation long ago in 
Shia Persia. The Islamic idea of the 
division of the religious and political func- 
tions of the State must not be confounded 
with the European idea of the separation of ^ 
C^hurch and State. The former is only a 
division of functions as is clear from the 
yradual creation in the Muslim State of the 
offices of Shaikh-ul-Islam and Ministers ; 
the latter is based on the metaphysical 
dualism of spirit and matter. Christianity 
began as an order of Monks having nothing 
to do with the affairs of the world ; Islam 
was, from the very beginning, a civil society 
with laws civil in their nature though 
believed to be revelational in origin. The 
metaphysical dualism on which the Euro- 
pean id.ea is based has . borne bitter fruit 
among Western nations. Many years ago a 
book was written in America called // 
Christ came to Chicago. In reviewing this 
book an American author says : 

The lesson to be learned from Mr. Stead's 
book is that the great evils from which hu- 
manity is suffering to-day are evils that can be 


handled only by religious sentiments ; that the 
handling of those evils has been in the great 
part surrendered to the State ; that the State 
has itself been delivered over to corrupt 
political machines ; that such machines are not 
only unwilling, but unable, to deal with those 
evils: and that nothing but a religious awaken- 
ing of the citis^ens to their public duties can 
save countless millions from misery, and the 
State itself from degradation. 
In the history of Muslim political ex- 
perience the separation has meant only a 
separation of functions, not of ideas. It 
cannot be maintained that in Muslim coun- 
tries the separation of Church and State 
means the freedom of Muslim legislative 
activity from the conscience of the people 
which has for centuries been trained and 
developed by the spirituality of Islam- 
Experience alone will show how the 
idea will work in modern Turkey. We can 
only hope that it will not be productive of 
the evils which it has produced in Europe 
and America. >##*l|ir'ili^^ . 

I have briefly discussed the above m- 
novations more for the sake of the Muslim 
■reader than for Pandit Jawahar Lai Nehru. 
The innovation speciftcally mentioned, hy 
the Pandit is the adoption by the Turks 
and Persians of racial and nationalist ideals. 


Hooms to think that the adoption of 
Hill h ideals means the abandonment of 
l il.un by Turkey and Persia, The student 
<jf history knows very well that Islam was 
Ixirn at a time when the old principles of 
human unification, such as blood relation- 
whip and throne-culture were failing. It, 
therefore, finds the principle of human uni- 
lii ation not in the blood and bones but in 
flu* miiid of man. Indeed its social message 
lo niankind is : " Deracialize yourself or 
pi«rish by internecine war." It is no exag- 
B(*ration to say that Islam looks askance at 
Nature's race-building plans and creates, 
I'V means of its peculiar institutions, an 
■ lutlonk which would counteract the race- 
iMiihliiig forces of nature. In the direction 
iit human domestication it has done in one 
I In i\i;sand years far more important work 
than ( ^liristianity and Budhism ever did in 
two thousand years or more. It is no less a niiiacle that an Indian Muslim finds 
liimsi lf at home in Morocco in spite of the 
di p iiity of race and language. Yet it 

f i'»t be said that Islam is totally opposed 

('• t .H r Its history shows that in social 
ii-loiiii it relies mainly on its scheme for 
I uiKihI deracialization and proceeds on the' 


lines of least resistance, " Verily, " says 
the Quran, *'We have made you into tribes 
and sub-tribes so that you may be identi- 
fied ; but the best among you in the eye of 
God is he who is the purest in life.'* Con- 
sidering the mightiness of the problem of 
race and the amount of time which the 
deracialization of mankind must necessarily 
take, the attitude of Islam towards the pro- 
blem of race, i.e., stooping to conquer with- 
out itself becoming a race-making factor, 
is the only rational and workable attitude. 
There is a remarkable passage in Sir Arthur 
Keith's little book, The Problem of Race, 
which is worth quoting here : 

And now man is awakening to the fact that 
Nature's primary end--race building--is incom- 
patible with the necessities of the modern econo- 
mic world and is asking himself : What must 
I do? Bring race-building as practised hitherto 
by nature to an end and have eternal peace? Or 
permit Nature to pursue her old course and 
have, as a necessary consequence — :War ? Man 
has to choose the one course or the other. There 
is no intermediate course possible. 
It is, therefore, clear that iftheAta-^ 
Turk is inspired by Pan-Turanianism he is: 
going not *o much against the spirit of Islam 
as against the spirit of the tirr? es. And if 
he is a believer in the absoluteness of 


rHCCR, he is sure to be defea 
t»pir it of modern times which is wholly in 
kri*|iint? with the spirit of Islam. Person- 
ally, however, I do not think that the Ata- 
Turk is inspired by Pan-Turanianism, as 
I In-lieve his Pan-Turanianism is only a 
political retort to Pan-Slavonism, or Pan- 
CJrrtnanism or Pan-Anglo-Saxonism. 

I ( the meaning of the above paragraph 
tH wi'll understood it is not difficult to see 
I hi- ^Ulitude of Islam towards nationalist 
ideals. Nationalism in the sense of love 
nfune^s country and even readiness to die 
lor its honour is a part of the Muslims' 
faith ; it comes into conflict with Islam only 
wlu-ri it begins to play the role of a political 
I uiKcpt and claims to be a principle of 
human solidarity demanding that Islam 
whould recede to the background of a mere 
private opinion and cease to be a living 
l.u tor in the national life. In Turkey, 
IN > ::ia, Egypt and other Muslim countries 
i'. will never become a problem. In these 
countries Muslims constitue an overwhel- 
ming majority and their minorities, i.e., 
Jcvvi, Christians and Zoroastrians, according 
to the law of Islam, are either "People of 
(hi* Ho{>k" or "like the People of the Book*' 



with whom the ]aw of Islam allows fre J 
social relations including matrimonial alliJ 
ances. It becomes a problem for Muslims 
only in countries where they happen to be 
in a minority, and nationalism demandsj 
their complete self-effacement. In majorit>^ 
countries Islam accommodates nationalisms 
lor there Islam and nationalism are practi-' 
cally id^entical in minority countries it isi 
justified an seeking self-determination as 
cultural unit. In either case, it is thoroughly 
consistent with itself. 

The above paragraphs briefly sum u 
ttie exact situation in the world of Islam 
to-day. If this is properly understood it 
will become clear that the fundamentals o 
islamic solidarity are not any way shaken 
,^J^y , Q^tern^] or internal forces. The 
solidarity of Islam, as I have explained 
before, consists in a uniform belief in the 
two structural principles of Islam supple- 
mented by the five well-known "practices 
ot the faith.'' These are the first essentials 
ot Islamic solidarity which has, in this 
sense existed ever since the days of the 
Holy Prophet until it was recently 
disturbed by the Bahais in Persia and the 
<^adianis in India. It is a guarantee for a 

I't.uiically uniform spiritual atmosphere in 
M).- world of Islam. It facilitates the 
PY'.'li*"il combination of Muslim states, 
which combmation may either assume the 
f'H ni of a world-state (ideal) or of a league 
'•I Mushm states, or of a number of inde- 
pi-ndt-iU states whose pacts and alliances 
Mi«* cU-ternimed by purely economic and 
polttn al considerations. That is how the 
foncpptual structure of this simple faith is 
• elated to the process of time. The pro- 
fundity of this relation can be understood 
'Hily m the light of certain veises of the 
Quran which it IS not possible to explain 
h.-rr without drifting away from the point 
Mnmr.lintely before us. Politically, then, 
Hh v..lidarity of Islam is shaken only when 
MuMhm states war on one another • 
M" hrHMisly it is shaken only when Muslims 
I' l- i auamst any of the basic beliefs and 
|n .ij ( ices of the Faith. It is in the interest 
of thhs eternal solidarity that Islam cannot 
tolerate any rebellious group within its fold. 
Uutside the fold such a group is entitled to 
•• much toleration as the followers of any 
Othtfr fttith. It appears to me that at the 
prirpicnt moment Islam is passing through 
4 P'-nod of transition. It is shifting from 


one form of political solidarity to some 
other form which the forces of history 
have yet to determine. Events are so 
rapidly moving in the modern world that 
it is almost impossible to make a prediction. 
As to what will be the attitude towards 
non-Muslims of a politically united Islam, 
if such a thing ever comes» is a question 
which history alone can answer. All that 
I can say is that, lying mid-way between 
Asia and Europe and being a synthesis ol 
Eastern and \vestern outlook on life, Islam 
ouqht to act as a kind of intermediary 
between the East and the West. But what, 
if the follies of Europe create an irreconci- 
lable Islam ? As things are developing in 
Europe from day to day they demapd a 
radical transformation of Europe's attitude 
towards Islam. We can only hope that 
political vision will not allow itself to be 
obscured by the dictates of imperial ambi-^ 
tion or economic exploitation. In so far 
as India is concerned I can say with perfect 
confidence that the Muslims of India will 
not submit to any kind of political idealism 
Which would seek to annihilate their 
cultural entity. Sure of this they may be 
trusted to know how to reconcile the claims 

47 ^ ^ 

"■I u'lii^ion and patriotism. 

( )iK- word about His Highness the Agha 
Khan. What has led Pandit Jawahar Lai 
Nfluu to attack the Agha Khan it is 
• iil/irult for me to discover. Perhaps he 
1 1 links that the Qadianis and the Ismailis 
hill under the same category. He is 
obvitjusly not aware that however the theo- 
l'>MJi'i^l interpretation of the Ismailis may 
^•i t, they beleive in* the basic principles 
f Islam. It is true that they believe in a 
^^•M netual Imamat ; but the Imam according 
ip thcin is not a recipient of Divine revela- 
tion. He is only an expounder of the Law: 
fi is only the other day (vide, the Star 
«»(' Alhihabad, March 12, 1934) that His 
MiKhncss the Agha Khan addressed his 
(olfowcrK as follows : 

Bear witness that Allah is One. Mtihammad 
iM the Prophet of Allah. Qaran is the Book of 
Alliih. Ka'ba IS the Qibla of all.' You are 
Mushins and should live with Muslims. Greet 
MuHlims with Assalam-o-Alai kum. 

Clive your children Islaniic names. Pray with 
Muslim congregations in mosques. Keep fast 
• i-mil.irly. Solemnize your marriages according 
ti» lNl4)mic rules of Nikah. Treat all Muslims 
•It your brothers. 

h is for the Pandit now to decide 
Will i her the Agha Khan represents the 
iiihtl.inty of Islam or not. 

Ahmadis are Traitor 

Botli To Islam An^ To lnd». 


June 21» 1936 

My dear Pandit Jawaharlal, 

Thank you so mych for your letter which 
i recewecr y^^sterday. At the time 1 wrote in 
reply to your articles I beheved that J^^ 

toJ^ver. your ivtuslini Admirers in the 
^'nZwhere felt perturbed th 
as they thought y°" ««« ^ ^ wT'^in'^y due 

rn^JinLuT ^'^^.;sV7a£.ttle^nterest i„ 

tht»n\n&v but had to dabble in U a oii 

traitors both to Islam and to India. 

I was extremely sorry to miss the opportunity 
of meeting you in Lahore. 1 was very ill in 
those days and could not leave my rooms. For 
the last two years, 1 have been Jiving a life 
practically of retirement on account of continued 
Illness. i>?) let me know when you come to the 
Punjab next. Did you receive my letter regarding 
your proposed Union for Civil Liberties? As 
you do not acknowledge it in your letter I 
fear if never reached you. 

Yours Sincerely 
Muhaminad Iqbail 

The iqbaUties, in Pakistan have not published 
this letter in any collection of IqbaFs letters 
which speaks itself about the Ahmadis effects. 

• * * , " 

This letter has been copied from a book "A BUNCH 
UF OLD LETTERS" published by Asia Publishing 
House, Bombay » Culcutta. New Delhi, Madras.